Power Generation Technologies, Trends, and Influences

Transcription

1 Power Generation Technologies, Trends, and Influences David W. Gandy Technical Executive, Nuclear Electric Power Research Institute Valve and Actuator Trends for the Power Industry March 7, 2013

2 Presentation Outline Current Electricity Generation Trends Transformation of the Electricity System Scenarios Impacting the Electricity Portfolio thru 2050 Materials Requirements & Needs Research in Materials Technologies at EPRI Materials Research for Valves at EPRI 2

3 Electricity Generation --Coal 38% of electricity generated in USA uses coal as fuel source (down from 50%) Abundant domestic energy resource 25% of world s total coal reserves (275 billion tons) Expected to comprise 35% of the national fuel mix in 2040 Significant improvements realized in pre- and postcombustion emission reduction technology Major Challenges: Uncertainty associated with environmental regulations & future CO2 emission limits; CO2 capture & storage technologies 3

4 Electricity Generation --Natural Gas 29% of total current generation is NG-based Expected to comprise 30% of national fuel mix in 2040 Low emissions Low capital costs and regulatory barriers for other fuels make natural gas-based generation easier to site and build New sources of natural gas such as shale gas are transforming the market Low prices currently Major Challenges: Environmental concerns with shale fracking & gas distribution 4

5 Electricity Generation --Nuclear 104 nuclear power plants in the USA provide 20% of the nation s electricity Expected to comprise 17% of national fuel mix in 2040 Largest non-emitting generation source Uranium is plentiful and efficient. Nuclear power plant performance continues to improve Major Challenges: High construction costs and used fuel disposal; safety concerns following Fukushima accident 5

6 Electricity Generation --Renewables (including Hydro) Hydro comprises 7% of USA generation Wind makes up 3%, while solar and biomass make up only a fraction of the generation Wind -- Tremendous growth in last few years ~52 GW installed through 2012 Wind generation can change rapidly, presenting challenges to the power system Renewables projected at 16% by 2040 Major Challenges: Storage & integration of variable generation. 6

7 Where Does Our Electricity Come From? 4.7% 0.5% 0.2% 7.1% 20.0% 38.3% Coal Gas Nuclear Hydro Renewables Oil Other 29.2% Nov 2011-Oct 2012 Electric Sector Generation Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration Power Monthly 7

8 Which Plants are Used the Most Today?

9 Different Fuel Mixes Used Across US Source: US DOE Information Administration (EIA-923)

10 How Many Plants Does it Take to Power a City? Nuclear Coal Natural Gas = = Biomass 1 2 Geothermal Wind Turbines 3 Solar Photovoltaic = = = , Million Annual electricity consumption for 1 million homes (based on average annual household consumption of 12,000 kilowatt hours) 10

11 Transformation of Electricity System Transformation will take time!!! Existing infrastructure built over several decades Significant uncertainty Lack of coherent Energy Policy in USA.. Environmental regulations? Climate policy? Renewable energy standards? Fuel prices? Investment in new plants? Challenge: Providing clean, reliable, & affordable energy. 11

12 National Generation Mix: Portfolios Examined Limited Portfolio Nuclear generation does not expand No CO 2 capture and storage (CCS) Natural Gas based on AEO 2010 Full Portfolio New Nuclear, plus 80% of existing capacity can extend to 80 years Coal w/ 90% Carbon Capture & Storage Natural Gas based on AEO 2010 Inter-Regional Transmission new builds Renewables costs decline faster & improved performance 12

13 TWh National Generation Mix: Reference Scenario (Today s policy) Limited Portfolio Energy Efficiency & Price Response* Full Portfolio Geothermal Solar 5000 AEO 2010 Baseline Wind 5000 Biomass 4000 Hydro New Nuclear 3000 Existing Nuclear 3000 Existing Nuclear 2000 Gas 2000 Gas New Coal New Coal 1000 Existing Coal * Above the black line reflects embedded EE in the AEO 2010 Reference Case

14 TWh National Generation Mix: CO 2 Controls (80% CO 2 Reduction by 2050) 7000 Limited Portfolio 7000 Full Portfolio Geothermal 5000 AEO 2010 Baseline Energy Efficiency & Price Response* 5000 New Coal 4000 Biomass Solar Wind 3000 New Nuclear 2000 Hydro+ Existing Nuclear 2000 Gas w/ccs Existing Coal Gas 1000 * Above the black line reflects embedded EE in the AEO 2010 Reference Case 14 0 New Coal w/ccs CCS Retrofit

15 TWh National Generation Mix: Clean Energy Standard 7000 Limited Portfolio 7000 Full Portfolio 6000 Energy Efficiency & Price Response* 6000 Geothermal 5000 AEO 2010 Baseline 5000 New Coal Solar Hydro+ Existing Nuclear Wind Biomass New Nuclear 2000 Gas Existing Coal * Above the black line reflects embedded EE in the AEO 2010 Reference Case 15 0 CCS Retrofit New Coal w/ccs

16 How Do We Achieve the Full Portfolio? Advanced Materials Technologies will certainly be an integral part of it! 16

17 Materials Requirements & Needs --Ultra-Supercritical Coal Technologies Increased Efficiency Reduced Emissions 17

18 Improvement in Energy Efficiency Current Market introduction US Current Market introduction by Japan and Europe (Steel R&D) A progressive increase in steam conditions has been taking place worldwide US A-USC Goal 5400/1350/ /1300/1325/ /1005/ /1165/ /1100/ /1085/ /1050/ psi / 1005 o F / 1050 o F R&D ongoing Europe, Japan, U.S. (Ni-based Materials) Mature technology 1950 s 1960 s 1970 s 1980 s 1990 s 2000 s 2010 s Cost Effective Materials Have Been Critical to Achieving Increased Efficiency Original Illustration: Courtesy of ALSTOM Power 18

19 U.S. DOE/OCDO: A-Ultra-Supercritical Steam Boiler Consortium Phase I 1: Conceptual Design 2: Material Properties 3: Steamside Oxidation 4: Fireside Corrosion 5: Welding 8: Design Data & Rules (including Code interface) 6: Fabricability 7: Coatings Develop the materials technology to fabricate and operate an A-USC steam boiler with steam parameters up to 1400 F (760 C) 19

20 DOE/OCDO A-USC Steam Turbine Consortium --Phase II Tasks 1.Rotor/Disc Testing (near full-size forgings) 2.Blade/Airfoil Alloy Testing 3.Valve Internals Alloy Testing 4.Rotor Alloy Welding and Characterization 5.Cast Casing Alloy Testing 6.Casing Welding and Repair 20

21 Materials Research at EPRI -- Ultra-Supercritical Coal Technologies Powder Metallurgy to Produce Valves, Pump Housings, Elbows, etc Advanced Austenitic Alloys Improved Life Prediction Technologies 21

22 Ultra-Supercritical Coal Technologies --Materials Needs Large castings Nickel-based turbine shells Stop & control valves Other valve bodies & pump housings Large forgings Nickel-based rotors & discs (large diameter) Austenitic extruded pipe & headers Nickel-based (eg., IN740 & 282) Creep resistant stainless steels 22

23 New Nuclear Plants Under Consideration in U.S. Alternate Energy Holdings 1-USEPR (1,600 MW) Nine Mile Point, UNE 1-USEPR (1,600 MW) Fermi, DTE Bell Bend/PPL, UNE 1-ESBWR (1,550 MW) 1-USEPR (1,600 MW) PSE&G Blue Castle, TP 1-Unspecified Technology 1-Unspecified Technology Calvert Cliffs, UNE Callaway, AEE 1-USEPR (1,600 MW) North Anna, D 1-Unspecified Technology 1-USEPR (1,600 MW) Harris, PGN Amarillo, UNE 2-USEPR (3,200 MW) Bellefonte, NS/TVA Lee Station, DUK 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) Summer, SCG 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) Comanche Peak, LUM/TXU 2-USAPWR (3,400 MW) Grand Gulf, NS/ETR 1-Unspecified Technology Alvin W. Vogtle, SO 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) COLA approved for issuance Filed COLA/ESP South Texas Project, NINA/NRG 2-ABWR (2,700 MW) River Bend, ETR 1-Unspecified Technology Levy County, PGN 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) Announced Intentions to File COLA COLA Review Suspended / Partially Suspended Victoria, EXE 2-ABWR (2,700 MW) * Turkey Point, FPL 2-AP1000 (2,200 MW) Source: NRC Expected New Nuclear Power Plant Applications (July 2009) / U.S DOE Nuclear Power Deployment Scorecard * COLA Amended to ESP 23

24 Materials Research at EPRI -- Nuclear Improved SCC-resistant alloys over Alloy 52 and 690 Co-free hardfacing alloys for valves & blades (reduced radiation exposure) Powder metallurgy/hip improved chemistries & inspection Joining for large sections 24

25 Nuclear --Materials Needs Large Forgings Reactor pressure vessel plate & nozzles (w/ controlled segregation) Improved forging quality-boiling Water Reactor (BWR) Core Shrouds Nickel-based rotors & discs (large diameter) Small Modular Reactors Courtesy: Omaha Public Power District Large Extruded Pipe w/ improved corrosion resistance 25

26 Valves Fossil Valve Issues Grade 91 lack of controls on both repairs & heat treatment of castings Hard-facing delamination due to cycling Ultra-supercritical Valve Issues No air-casting methods for large turbine shells & stop/control valves Nuclear Valve Issues Inspection of castings (porosity, segregation, grain size variance, etc) No definitive inspection method NRC pushing to improve inspection of cast components 26

27 316L Stainless Steel --Powder Metallurgy/HIP X courtesy Rolls-Royce 2010 Good tensile/yield properties Charpy Impact: >122 ft-lbs (3 orientations) No Porosity, homogenous microstructures Good Fatigue properties Inspection, near forging quality 2011 ASME Code Case & NRC Review submitted 11/

28 Grade 91 (9Cr-1Mo steel) --Powder Metallurgy/HIP 500X 2011 Good tensile/yield/creep properties Charpy Impact: >78 ft-lbs (3 orientations) No Porosity, homogenous microstructures Inspection, near forging quality ASME Code Case & Data Pkg submitted 11/

29 Erosion-Resistant Hard-facing Alloy Development P/M-HIP parts and tests specimens Alloy modeling & development 29

30 Summary No one technology, fuel or resource is the right choice. A range of generation options produces the least cost and impact on economy. Existing generation will take time and significant investment to replace & upgrade. Advances in technologies will require new alloys, improved materials processes, re-investment in forging capabilities. 30

31 Together Shaping the Future of Electricity 31